Talk:Blonde Ambition

2008 release date?

I was reading in People magazine the other day that this film was so horrible it was rejected by movie theaters, and DVD companys. Because of how bad it was, the only way its going to be released is if Jessica Simpson sells it herself (apparently shes going to be selling it on tv), because the DVD companys wouldnt sell it due to how terrible it was. 71.207.138.63 21:51, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Don't read and believe in rumors... :) This film is good, worth to watch, even in a theatre. Misibacsi (talk) 20:41, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

So were you the one who saw it opening weekend? Snowfire51 (talk) 02:03, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

Copyvio

Huge slabs of the text (if not the whole thing) on the intro are lifted from http://www.empireonline.com/news/story.asp?NID=19992 I've added the appropriate template: someone will need to clean this up quickly. I don't know enough about the film to do so nor, frankly, am I sufficiently interested to do so.
*Septegram*Talk*Contributions* 19:54, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

I'm glad this article is lifted from somewhere. If it wasn't, there would be someone out there writing horrible encyclopedia articles. I had been on Uncyclopedia a few minutes before heading here, but I had forgotten that I had switched to Wikipedia when I went back to the article. I read the text of the page and thought it was one of the website's funnier entries, before I saw the maintenance tags and realised this was Wikipedia. VolatileChemical 21:26, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Movie Poster

I believe the image is fan made (correct me if I'm wrong). The image of Jessica Simpson is from her 'A Public Affair' album photoshoot, and wouldn't be used for a movie poster. If I'm right, this should be removed. — hippi ippi₊₊⁺⁺ 07:00, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

The term itself

I understand that Blonde Ambition is a term used to for ambitious blondes but where does the term originate? does it have a more specific meaning other than whatever the writer decides it to mean? i have tried to search this but have drawn a blank. M —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.42.31.28 (talk) 13:32, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

Why such a small release ?

8 Cinemas for 12 days only ? Why ? A total take of $6,422 ! This is bizarre ! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 116.24.204.215 (talk) 14:57, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Blonde Ambition. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071128204119/http://www.sonypictures.com:80/homevideo/catalog/catalogDetail_DVD043396227569.html to http://www.sonypictures.com/homevideo/catalog/catalogDetail_DVD043396227569.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:46, 4 November 2016 (UTC)

Cult film??

I originally included this passage in the article

The movie has been characterized as a cult film.

The reason was that I found it - or rather an even longer, more exuberant celebration of that film, over at Luke Wilson, where it had zero relevance (and was originally added here). I now move it here to the talk page as I have no idea whether this opinion is notable. What makes matters even stranger is that the three sources are an identical text appearing in three places under three different names. Do with that what you will as it long as it doesn't reappear on any actor's article. Str1977 ^(talk) 06:32, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

I see now that the same editor spammed these links here as well and was subsequently reverted, Case closed, I guess. Str1977 ^(talk) 16:23, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

References